Hide in Plain Sight


Rules Questions

301 to 338 of 338 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Komoda wrote:
Snowlilly wrote:
Komoda wrote:
Shadowlord wrote:

Komoda,

Based on the debate in this forum I posted a question to the Illuminating the Darkness thread and linked it to Mark Seifter's Q&A thread. After the holidays he replied to the question here:

Quote:
Yeah, "actual light" vs "perceived light" is pretty annoying, particularly for features that rely on the exact position of "shadows". I would tend to agree that anything that depends on the absolute light level of an area should just use the way it works for normal vision;...
This is coming from the designer who wrote the Illuminating the Darkness entry and should hopefully eliminate some confusion.

Thanks. It might have to revert to that to make the game work, I understand that. But that ruling/result does need to ignore LLV and Darkvision. My point has always been that nothing in HiPS or any other skill, ever states that it does.

As to the debate, I never asked that people switch to my position. Only that they acknowledge that LLV and Darkvision have to be ignored to reach their position.

To that end, I also posed a question to Mr. Seifter:

While I see no other way to play for most skills and spells that rely upon Dim Light (shadow), doesn't this ruling negate the benefits of Low Light Vision and Darkvision of targets in relation to abilities such as Hide in Plain Sight (Shadowdancer & Assassin versions) even though there is no such mention of doing so in those Hide in Plain Sight abilities?

Low light vision and darkvision do not change ambient light levels.
Do you think I ever advocated that it did?

Then what are you going on about? LLV and DV do not affect HIPS. Done.


Isonaroc wrote:
Komoda wrote:
Snowlilly wrote:
Komoda wrote:
Shadowlord wrote:

Komoda,

Based on the debate in this forum I posted a question to the Illuminating the Darkness thread and linked it to Mark Seifter's Q&A thread. After the holidays he replied to the question here:

Quote:
Yeah, "actual light" vs "perceived light" is pretty annoying, particularly for features that rely on the exact position of "shadows". I would tend to agree that anything that depends on the absolute light level of an area should just use the way it works for normal vision;...
This is coming from the designer who wrote the Illuminating the Darkness entry and should hopefully eliminate some confusion.

Thanks. It might have to revert to that to make the game work, I understand that. But that ruling/result does need to ignore LLV and Darkvision. My point has always been that nothing in HiPS or any other skill, ever states that it does.

As to the debate, I never asked that people switch to my position. Only that they acknowledge that LLV and Darkvision have to be ignored to reach their position.

To that end, I also posed a question to Mr. Seifter:

While I see no other way to play for most skills and spells that rely upon Dim Light (shadow), doesn't this ruling negate the benefits of Low Light Vision and Darkvision of targets in relation to abilities such as Hide in Plain Sight (Shadowdancer & Assassin versions) even though there is no such mention of doing so in those Hide in Plain Sight abilities?

Low light vision and darkvision do not change ambient light levels.
Do you think I ever advocated that it did?
Then what are you going on about? LLV and DV do not affect...

Those are different statements. If I have not been able to show you how they are different as of yet, (even if you disagree with my result) then I will never be able to.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You've never actually presented evidence that HiPS doesn't use ambient light levels.

You've made the claim that it doesn't, but never actual evidence.


Komoda wrote:
It might have to revert to that to make the game work, I understand that.

I don't think this is a "revert." This is a rules responsible designer saying how it should work. His statement falls perfectly in line with statements from the creative designer, as well as the understanding of the rules that several people on this thread have.

Komoda wrote:
But that ruling/result does need to ignore LLV and Darkvision.

Nothing in LLV or DV is being ignored, the abilities don't say that they change the ambient light level. Without a change in ambient light level there is nothing preventing HiPS from functioning.

Komoda wrote:
My point has always been that nothing in HiPS or any other skill, ever states that it does.

HiPS functions of the ambient light level (presence of dim light). You are insisting that there should be explicit language where none is needed;nothing in the LLV or DV rules states they have any effect at all on the actual, ambient light level.

Komoda wrote:
Only that they acknowledge that LLV and Darkvision have to be ignored to reach their position.

I will go so far as to say I think I understand your point of view. Personally though, I would not acknowledge that LLV or DV have to be ignored because I don't think your using a valid interpretation of the rules of LLV or DV. I believe you are adding effects and capabilities to those types of vision that the rules do not specify or intend. I have not seen anything presented from the rules (I may have missed something, repost it if you think I am wrong) that indicates LLV or DV do anything to the ambient light level; or anything for that matter besides increase the visual acuity in lower light levels. HiPS says nothing about being interrupted by a creature's visual acuity. It says if X exists you may do Y. (X = dim light, Y = Use Stealth even while being observed and not within cover or concealment.)

Komoda wrote:

To that end, I also posed a question to Mr. Seifter:

While I see no other way to play for most skills and spells that rely upon Dim Light (shadow), doesn't this ruling negate the benefits of Low Light Vision and Darkvision of targets in relation to abilities such as Hide in Plain Sight (Shadowdancer & Assassin versions) even though there is no such mention of doing so in those Hide in Plain Sight abilities?

And you received an answer:

Not necessarily; hide in plain sight in particular gets more complicated yet, since its claim to fame is the ability to hide while being observed at the time. If you couldn't do that while any creature with darkvision was nearby (like your own shadow companion), it wouldn't really help much.

This is in line with the things I posted above from the creative designer, and this is in line with what Mr. Seifter said earlier in reply to my question. If these statements do not fall in line with your interpretation of the rules it may be time to rethink and adjust your understanding of the rules. (Not to say you have to change, in any way, how you are playing home games)

These may not be the answers you're hoping for, or the answers you want, but they are answers. Two designers, including the one who wrote the Illuminating the Darkness post so presumably understands how it should work, have stated LLV/DV don't effect use of HiPS.


While there is an answer, I do not feel that my question was answered.

It shows the misunderstanding of it by even suggesting that the Darkvision of a Shadowdancer's Shadow Companion's would ever have any affect on HiPS of the Shadowdancer whatsoever.

I break down the answer into three parts:

Part I: "not necessarily" could only mean that LLV and Darkvision are "not necessarily" negated, as that was the question. So there is nothing to be gained from this for either side.

Part II: "HiPS is complicated/observed." This again does not pertain to the changes in the area that is Dim Light associated with LLV or Darkvision, as my entire question is based around. So still nothing to be gained for either side of the position.

Part III: "nearby darkvision" is an invalid response due to common, but faulty, logic that explains an impossible outcome in regards to the HiPS vs. Observer model that I propose which only mirrors the Stealth vs. Observer model we all know and agree works without breaking the game. This only shows that yet again, someone is missing the question, whether it be due to how I am presenting it, or their reading of it with preconceived notions, I cannot be sure.

Furthermore, when the question was clarified so that it could not be misunderstood, and added to by TOZ, Mr. Seifter chose not to answer and apparently to leave it to the FAQ process.

I think this clear evidence that there is still no official answer to my specific question.

And clearly, I may never get it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Komoda wrote:

While there is an answer, I do not feel that my question was answered.

It shows the misunderstanding of it by even suggesting that the Darkvision of a Shadowdancer's Shadow Companion's would ever have any affect on HiPS of the Shadowdancer whatsoever.

I break down the answer into three parts:

Part I: "not necessarily" could only mean that LLV and Darkvision are "not necessarily" negated, as that was the question. So there is nothing to be gained from this for either side.

Part II: "HiPS is complicated/observed." This again does not pertain to the changes in the area that is Dim Light associated with LLV or Darkvision, as my entire question is based around. So still nothing to be gained for either side of the position.

Part III: "nearby darkvision" is an invalid response due to common, but faulty, logic that explains an impossible outcome in regards to the HiPS vs. Observer model that I propose which only mirrors the Stealth vs. Observer model we all know and agree works without breaking the game. This only shows that yet again, someone is missing the question, whether it be due to how I am presenting it, or their reading of it with preconceived notions, I cannot be sure.

Furthermore, when the question was clarified so that it could not be misunderstood, and added to by TOZ, Mr. Seifter chose not to answer and apparently to leave it to the FAQ process.

I think this clear evidence that there is still no official answer to my specific question.

And clearly, I may never get it.

I think I understand your POV. Though I have to say, I think you are: A) in denial about the implications of the answers provided, and B) over analyzing the answer’s Mr. Seifter gave, to both you and I, to (deliberate or not) invalidate them.

The creative designer has, at separate times, stated that neither LLV nor DV help in any special way against the use of HiPS. Those statements were from the perspective of the “observer” having these visual acuities against a hider with HiPS and not talking about canceling HiPS all together. While Mr. Seifter’s response may not have been as specific or clear to your particular case as you’d like he did in fact indicate that LLV and DV do not have effects on the use of HiPS. He did not say anything that would point toward LLV or DV having an effect on the use of HiPS.

In fact, in his reply to my question he stated clearly, “…I would tend to agree that anything that depends on the absolute light level of an area should just use the way it works for normal vision;...”

So, IMO, the burden of proof is on you to show in some way, based on RAW, that HiPS does not rely on “actual/absolute” light level vs. “perceived” light level.

The designer statements I linked above may not specifically answer your exact question, but they generally answer the situation in multiple ways. Regardless of whether the answers are directed at your specific question they still apply to the situation and your argument seems to be in contradiction with what they've said. It’s a bit like asking if you can run with scissors, someone telling you not to run with sharp objects, and you deciding to run with scissors anyway because they weren’t specific enough, to your particular question, in their answer. I realize that’s over simplifying, but it’s kinda how I see it at this point.

Shadow Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

New FAQ.

Quote:

Dim Light: When an ability requires a character to be near shadows or an area of dim light (like the shadowdancer’s shadow jump or hide in plain sight), how does that interact with low-light vision, darkvision, and the like?

While it’s true that most creatures in the game have low-light vision or darkvision, when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level (for example “in an area of dim light”), they always refer to the state of light and darkness from the perspective of normal vision, like a human. The exceptions, effects that depend on an observing creature’s perspective, such as the heavens shaman’s enveloping darkness ability, call this out with text indicating that the ability alters or depends on that creature’s perspective, rather than the overall light level.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Happy TOZ is happy.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Cool!


And that's the sweet sweet sound of 10,000 forum posters going silent. Ahh.


GOOD. I'm glad Shadowdancer's biggest call to fame and major ability isn't rendered utterly useless by an ability most monstrous creature's possess. FAQ'd the other way, this would have surely played havoc with perception and perceiving creatures in its entirety.


Excellent news! Thank you PFD Team!


Komoda, regarding your post from the FAQ thread:

Komoda wrote:

Ok, the ruling has been made and it is clear on the Dev's position about HiPS.

But... Come on, you knew it was coming:

Now the FAQ, as written (probably not as intended), pretty much states that anyone can stealth (without HiPS) from an elf at 25' from a torch because there is nothing to "call this out with text indicating that the ability alters or depends on that creature’s perspective, rather than the overall light level". This is especially true since Stealth and HiPS both rely on the Stealth skill and the location of Dim Light. Without the "exception text" in either rules set, they would both follow the same set of rules, correct?

I can't find anything under LLV that would count as an exception.

Darkvision is covered by "In an area of dim light, a character can see somewhat. Creatures within this area have concealment (20% miss chance in combat) from those without darkvision..." (CRB p172).

Is there any other exception written into the game? I can't seem to find the example listed in the FAQ. Do they mean Enveloping Void? Or possibly Enveloping Darkness from the Sorcerer Bloodline?

Disclaimer: I am just trying to work out the bugs. I think this FAQ has some. I think the RAI is pretty clear that HiPS ignores LLV and Darkvision (I don't know why it doesn't just say that). I don't like it, but I give you that you were correct.

Stealth calls out it's own requirements, which are not "objective" light levels as the FAQ is talking about. Stealth's requirement is concealment or cover.


For this part of stealth, the objective light level is Dim Light as Dim Light is what grants the concealment to enable one to make a Stealth check. If, as the FAQ states, Dim Light is based off of the static state (or ambient, or what ever word you want for doesn't change) unless an ability expressly states otherwise, then concealment is in effect 25' from a torch in regards to Stealth, even to an elf. This is because there is no "exception text" in Stealth or LLV.

And again, I am as sure as you are that this is not the RAI, but there clearly is nothing in the stealth rules or the straight LLV rules that "...call this out with text indicating that the ability alters or depends on that creature’s perspective, rather than the overall light level."


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Komoda, the FAQ is about abilities like HiPS, not Stealth at large.

Stop trying to be right.


So we should just pick and choose when to apply the FAQ rather than go by the statement in the FAQ that explicitly states when to apply it? How is that a good plan?

The FAQ clearly states that to base something off of the observer, the rules will tell you. But nothing that I could find is listed as based off the observer, except darkvision, (can't hide within 60') but we aren't supposed to go off of that because we all know that isn't actually true.

Irontruth, please stop attacking me like you have any idea what I am doing. I have always advocated for making the rules say what they mean rather than requiring new players to infer 2-3 different parts and choose what to follow to try to make any sense of it.

I didn't design the stealth/vision/HiPS rules. But if you read them today as actually written and without years of experience of what "should be" and try to apply all of them, it is impossible. You have to infer things that aren't written (or weren't until this FAQ) like HiPS ignores LLV and Darkvision, and ignore things that are clearly written like "can't hide within 60' of someone with darkvision".

Yeah, I have been playing since the open playtest and was a playtester for 3.5 so I understand how to make it work at the table, but that doesn't mean that the game couldn't use a lot of cleaning up. If you don't care if it is cleaned up, move on.

In every game I have played, Light, Vision, and Terrain are basically ignored because so few people understand it or have the phys-reps/maps to convey the information to the players. Even most of the Paizo maps fail to identify the characteristics found in a square.

In my games, we use a projector or TV with our maps. We try to program vision, light and terrain so that with a click or two, we all know who can see what. But to do so, the rules need to be clear and they need to work together.

I am all about making the rules say what they mean. The HiPS FAQ clarifies the intent of HiPS beyond anything I could remotely counter. But as written, changes how dim light works for an elf. That in turn affects where characters can stealth against an elf in regards to the single torch scenario.

On another note "The presence of light does not spoil darkvision. (CRB p562) also is not actually true since in a area without light, a shadowdancer could not use HiPS against a dwarf with Darkvision, but if a torch were within 50' of the dwarf, the shadowdancer could. Which is amusing because a Shadowdancer dragging a sunrod 5' behind them can hide better than one in darkness.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

*head*

*desk*


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Komada wrote:
So we should just pick and choose when to apply the FAQ rather than go by the statement in the FAQ that explicitly states when to apply it? How is that a good plan?

Because its the opposite of.. whatever your plan is. That makes it likely to be the right answer.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Some men you just can't reach.


He is however basically right about the various stealth rules being a horrible mashed up pile of contradictions. There really isn't a way to run them RAW - you just have to try to grasp for intent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
He is however basically right about the various stealth rules being a horrible mashed up pile of contradictions. There really isn't a way to run them RAW - you just have to try to grasp for intent.

and having come to that realization insists on going to raw.

Intent is pretty clear: the shadowdancer is wrapping the stuff of shadow about themselves. Most of the writers being human, they've defined shadow from the perspective of puny human vision despite the entire rest of the planet having better vision.


Komoda are you saying the majority of are misinterpreted the new FAQ, or are you saying you understand the intent but it's not written well enough?


Komoda wrote:

So we should just pick and choose when to apply the FAQ rather than go by the statement in the FAQ that explicitly states when to apply it? How is that a good plan?

The FAQ clearly states that to base something off of the observer, the rules will tell you. But nothing that I could find is listed as based off the observer, except darkvision, (can't hide within 60') but we aren't supposed to go off of that because we all know that isn't actually true.

Irontruth, please stop attacking me like you have any idea what I am doing. I have always advocated for making the rules say what they mean rather than requiring new players to infer 2-3 different parts and choose what to follow to try to make any sense of it.

I know exactly what you're doing. You're trying to prove that you're still right by trying to create flaws in the FAQ.

Except there isn't one. You're just reading it wrong.

The FAQ has nothing to do with regular Stealth. The FAQ is about HiPS. Since your "question" is about regular Stealth, it means you're reading the FAQ wrong, because it isn't about regular Stealth.

If your question were about HiPS, then the FAQ would apply. But your question isn't about HiPS, so this FAQ is irrelevant. The FAQ does not change the interaction of light, Stealth, Low Light Vision and/or Darkvision. All those things still operate exactly as written. The FAQ is a clarification about HiPS, nothing else.


wraithstrike wrote:
Komoda are you saying the majority of are misinterpreted the new FAQ, or are you saying you understand the intent but it's not written well enough?

I thought I made it pretty clear that I agree the intent is to make HiPS and other skills "static" to normal vision. I thought I wrote that in like three different posts so that people didn't think I was trying to change what the FAQ intended.

This part pretty much sums it up:

Komoda wrote:
And again, I am as sure as you are that this is not the RAI, but there clearly is nothing in the stealth rules or the straight LLV rules that "...call this out with text indicating that the ability alters or depends on that creature’s perspective, rather than the overall light level."

-----

Irontruth wrote:
Komoda wrote:

So we should just pick and choose when to apply the FAQ rather than go by the statement in the FAQ that explicitly states when to apply it? How is that a good plan?

The FAQ clearly states that to base something off of the observer, the rules will tell you. But nothing that I could find is listed as based off the observer, except darkvision, (can't hide within 60') but we aren't supposed to go off of that because we all know that isn't actually true.

Irontruth, please stop attacking me like you have any idea what I am doing. I have always advocated for making the rules say what they mean rather than requiring new players to infer 2-3 different parts and choose what to follow to try to make any sense of it.

I know exactly what you're doing. You're trying to prove that you're still right by trying to create flaws in the FAQ.

Except there isn't one. You're just reading it wrong.

The FAQ has nothing to do with regular Stealth. The FAQ is about HiPS. Since your "question" is about regular Stealth, it means you're reading the FAQ wrong, because it isn't about regular Stealth.

If your question were about HiPS, then the FAQ would apply. But your question isn't about HiPS, so this FAQ is irrelevant. The FAQ does not change the interaction of light, Stealth, Low Light Vision and/or Darkvision. All those things still operate exactly as written. The FAQ is a clarification about HiPS, nothing else.

The question listed is about Dim Light, not specific skills. HiPS is only listed as an example. It is not the focus/subject of the question.

The answer is about all light levels, not just Dim Light. It would also affect feats such as Hellcat Stealth which are usable at the opposite end of the light spectrum. Are you saying that this FAQ does not apply to Hellcat Stealth?

Its not that I think anyone is misunderstanding the intent. It is that we see the meaning because we are so experienced with the game that we are ignoring the implications of what it actually states. we are automatically reading over it because we know what they mean, even though they are not saying it. It is like when you are in a conversation with someone and they say "pass me a knife" but you give them a spoon because you know they are using it for soup and they just used the wrong word without realizing it. If you ask them, they are sure they said spoon.

Look at "the rules" (that is the term the FAQ uses, not "special abilities" or "spells" or "class abilities" just "the rules") and you should see that:

Stealth has no exception text. (I can't quote a negative)
Darkvision has exception text. "A creature can’t hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover."

But I think most of us agree, we are supposed to treat Stealth like it has exception text and we know we are supposed to treat Darkvision like it does not.

I ask you a few very simple questions:

Are Stealth and LLV part of "the rules"?
Does stealth (part of "the rules") have the exception text mentioned in the FAQ?
Does LLV (part of "the rules") have the exception text mentioned in the FAQ?

If they do not, why would you berate me for wanting it added?

How could a new player that is aware of this FAQ look at stealth and LLV with fresh eyes and not come to the conclusion that since there is no exception text, the concealment granted from Dim Light applies to a static area and not the effective area of the observer?

If you see some exemption text that I do not see, please point it out. I am totally accepting that the Devs made their intention clear. I am not trying to reinterpret that intent. I think the wording leaves a lot to be desired.

And I am not the first person to see a problem with the wording of a FAQ. Past FAQ text has been changed to be more clear. Even the intent of other FAQs have flat out been shown as wrong (which I am not saying this one is) and have been changed completely.


Komoda wrote:
If they do not, why would you berate me for wanting it added?

That's what the FAQ is for...

EDIT: I think I know what you're getting at. So I'll try to untangle the confusion.
The FAQ addresses abilities that are calling out specific light levels. This does not affect Stealth, since Stealth never addresses a light level, only cover and concealment. Dim light and darkness does provide concealment, granted that the observer can't see through this specific concealment (see perfectly in the given area).
I really don't see what more needs to be added.


Komoda, I read some of your comments but others seemed to think you were saying something different so I wanted to be sure that I was not misinterpreting. Thanks for replying.

With regard to HiPS it depends on the actual light level, not the ability to ignore the light level.

That shadow is there whether you can see in darkness or not. If it relied on concealment like stealth does, that would be different.

edit: I see that I was ninja'd by Rub-Eta


wraithstrike wrote:


Komoda, I read some of your comments but others seemed to think you were saying something different so I wanted to be sure that I was not misinterpreting. Thanks for replying.

With regard to HiPS it depends on the actual light level, not the ability to ignore the light level.

That shadow is there whether you can see in darkness or not. If it relied on concealment like stealth does, that would be different.

edit: I see that I was ninja'd by Rub-Eta

Right, the FAQ makes it clear that HiPS ignores LLV and Darkvision by only working off of the current level of light, as a human sees it. I think we agree there.

But then the FAQ goes on to state that ALL things ("the rules") in the rules go by the current level of light, as a human sees it, unless there is specific text stating otherwise. (I have no idea why they added this condition to the rules, but they did.)

The concealment in Stealth (as it pertains to this conversation, not all parts of Stealth or forms of concealment) is due to the fact that Dim Light gives that concealment. Again, since there is no exception text (text that explicitly states it is based on the observer's perception rather than the human's vision) in Stealth, or LLV, then with the FAQ, one could hide from an Elf at 25' from a torch (as the only light source) because to a human, that square is Dim Light and Dim Light gives concealment.


Let me be clear, the FAQ answer itself is not about stealth or HiPS. It is about how to apply levels of light to a situation. In all situations that don't explicitly state otherwise, "they (the rules) always refer to the state of light and darkness from the perspective of normal vision, like a human."

Are you trying to tell me that always doesn't mean always?

The rules talk about how Dim Light gives you concealment. That right there invokes the FAQ. When the rules discuss Dim Light, it ALWAYS talks about Dim Light from the point of view of a human. It says so right above.

It doesn't say "sometimes", "most times", "various times" or anything to indicate anything other than all times. It goes further to say if this is not true, there will be text that states it.

So, according to the FAQ, 25' from a torch, the Dim Light condition exists, ALWAYS. As the Dim Light condition exists, concealment exists. As concealment exists, Stealth can happen.

There is no text giving LLV creatures or Darkvision creatures an exception. Is there?


Komoda wrote:

Let me be clear, the FAQ answer itself is not about stealth or HiPS. It is about how to apply levels of light to a situation. In all situations that don't explicitly state otherwise, "they (the rules) always refer to the state of light and darkness from the perspective of normal vision, like a human."

Are you trying to tell me that always doesn't mean always?

The rules talk about how Dim Light gives you concealment. That right there invokes the FAQ. When the rules discuss Dim Light, it ALWAYS talks about Dim Light from the point of view of a human. It says so right above.

It doesn't say "sometimes", "most times", "various times" or anything to indicate anything other than all times. It goes further to say if this is not true, there will be text that states it.

So, according to the FAQ, 25' from a torch, the Dim Light condition exists, ALWAYS. As the Dim Light condition exists, concealment exists. As concealment exists, Stealth can happen.

There is no text giving LLV creatures or Darkvision creatures an exception. Is there?

Well, strictly speaking, you can't use Stealth within 60' of a creature with Darkvision without cover or invisibility, so I'd say Darkvision is covered.


Komoda wrote:


Yeah, I have been playing since the open playtest and was a playtester for 3.5 so I understand how to make it work at the table, but that doesn't mean that the game couldn't use a lot of cleaning up. If you don't care if it is cleaned up, move on.

By the way, I'm a fairly avid playtester. I playtest games for a significant number of indie designers and several bigger publishers. In one group we even have the 3.0, three hole punched, WotC internal playtest documents. I've playtested at least a dozen boardgames on the market, plus another 30+ that will never see the light of day.

I find the original rules to be clear and unambiguous. Which led me (and many others) to conclude correctly how HiPS would interact with LLV and Darkvision.

You on the other hand routinely skipped whatever context didn't suit your position and so found difficulty with the text and arrived at the incorrect conclusion.

I find the FAQ to be clear and unambiguous and think it works just fine as it's written and doesn't create any new problems.

You are skipping context that doesn't suit your position though and find it complex, confusing and creating rules problems.

Perhaps, instead of just digging your heels in, take a breath and look at it the way I'm suggesting you look at it. You might find that suddenly everything clears up and it all makes sense again.

Or continue ignoring context that doesn't suit your argument.


Komoda wrote:


Are you trying to tell me that always doesn't mean always?

Yes

While it’s true that most creatures in the game have low-light vision or darkvision, when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level (for example “in an area of dim light”), they always refer to the state of light and darkness from the perspective of normal vision, like a human.

When X happens then always is not always.
I always dance when i drink does not parce into i always dance.

or . well. it SHOULDN"T...


Komoda wrote:
For this part of stealth, the objective light level is Dim Light as Dim Light is what grants the concealment to enable one to make a Stealth check.

You are adding things to the FAQ that simply aren't there and you are adding things to the basic Stealth skill rules that simply aren't there. If you wan't to argue that RAW is broken you need to stick to actual Rules As Written, not RAW plus whatever you're adding in your mind because you're trying to find flaws.

Stealth:
You are skilled at avoiding detection, allowing you to slip past foes or strike from an unseen position. This skill covers hiding and moving silently.

Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Creatures that fail to beat your Stealth check are not aware of you and treat you as if you had total concealment. You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a -5 penalty. It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.

Creatures gain a bonus or penalty on Stealth checks based on their size: Fine +16, Diminutive +12, Tiny +8, Small +4, Medium +0, Large -4, Huge -8, Gargantuan -12, Colossal -16.

If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.

Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make and attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).

Sniping: If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location.

Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth check while people are aware of you.

Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.

Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving.

If you have the Stealthy feat, you get a bonus on Stealth checks (see Feats).

There's not a single thing in there about "objective light levels" of any kind. The requirement is concealment/cover. Your inference of "For this part of stealth, the objective light level is Dim Light as Dim Light is what grants the concealment to enable one to make a Stealth check," is NOT a problem with RAW, it's a problem with your inference.

Komoda wrote:
The FAQ clearly states that to base something off of the observer, the rules will tell you.

Doesn't matter in regard to Stealth; Stealth doesn't in any way reference "objective light levels." Your argument is made invalid by this caveat in the FAQ: "when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level."

Komoda wrote:
The FAQ clearly states that to base something off of the observer, the rules will tell you.

Only: "when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level (for example “in an area of dim light”)"

HiPS has text "As long as she is within 10 feet of an area of dim light," Stealth has no such text. Stealth does not qualify to be applied to this FAQ. (Unless one does, as you have, and adds words to the actual RAW)

Komoda wrote:
But then the FAQ goes on to state that ALL things ("the rules") in the rules go by the current level of light, as a human sees it, unless there is specific text stating otherwise.

"When the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level," which Stealth NEVER does.

Komoda wrote:
The concealment in Stealth (as it pertains to this conversation, not all parts of Stealth or forms of concealment) is due to the fact that Dim Light gives that concealment.

This is not RAW. RAW is what's actually written. Nothing in Stealth talks about "objective light levels." You're making false inferences and injections into RAW for your own interpretation.

Of course there are going to be problems in the rules when you intentionally add things to RAW to point out problems. But your argument is not a problem in RAW. Not by any stretch. It's a problem with your inferences and interpretation, I suspect because you want there to be problems.

Komoda wrote:
Let me be clear, the FAQ answer itself is not about stealth or HiPS. It is about how to apply levels of light to a situation.

Only: "when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level."

Komoda wrote:
In all situations that don't explicitly state otherwise

This statement is you adding to RAW. This is not in RAW or the FAQ, this isn't even accurate. The FAQ specifically states when it applies, which is only: "when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level."

There is no such language in Stealth, you are simply fabricating a connection to point out holes that don't actually exist.


So gaining concealment due to being in dim light is not "being in or near an objective light level?"


Don't add to RAW because you'd like to be able to point at problems where there are none.

Nothing in Stealth fits the FAQ criteria of, "when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level."

You're fabricating a connection between the FAQ and the Stealth skill where none exists.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

*sigh* Some ************* are always trying to ice skate uphill...

Just let it go, everyone. It is utterly apparent that nothing is going to convince them that they aren't correct.


Komoda wrote:
So gaining concealment due to being in dim light is not "being in or near an objective light level?"

Correct. Because like cover it is relative to the observer, whereas what a shadow dancer wraps around themselves is objective.


Komoda wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:


Komoda, I read some of your comments but others seemed to think you were saying something different so I wanted to be sure that I was not misinterpreting. Thanks for replying.

With regard to HiPS it depends on the actual light level, not the ability to ignore the light level.

That shadow is there whether you can see in darkness or not. If it relied on concealment like stealth does, that would be different.

edit: I see that I was ninja'd by Rub-Eta

Right, the FAQ makes it clear that HiPS ignores LLV and Darkvision by only working off of the current level of light, as a human sees it. I think we agree there.

But then the FAQ goes on to state that ALL things ("the rules") in the rules go by the current level of light, as a human sees it, unless there is specific text stating otherwise. (I have no idea why they added this condition to the rules, but they did.)

The concealment in Stealth (as it pertains to this conversation, not all parts of Stealth or forms of concealment) is due to the fact that Dim Light gives that concealment. Again, since there is no exception text (text that explicitly states it is based on the observer's perception rather than the human's vision) in Stealth, or LLV, then with the FAQ, one could hide from an Elf at 25' from a torch (as the only light source) because to a human, that square is Dim Light and Dim Light gives concealment.

Why does it need to?

The rules say that if you have LLV, and darkvision that you don't deal with concealment penalties already. They are not in the stealth section, but I have never known anybody to have trouble knowing that the concealment from low light/dim lit areas is not there if you have low light vision.

Carrying that over to stealth if the observer is not dealing with concealment that there are no stealth checks.

Another example is being invisible(grants concealment), and you having blindsight which doesn't cancel out being invisible(the low light condition as a comparison), but it does remove the concealment.

I know sometimes the rules has what I call "reminder rules text" that draws a connection between rules, but this is a case where it is not needed for most people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You have no idea how many human rogues i've seen try to "stealth through the darkness" only to have monsters at the other end of the hall go

"what is it doing?
"I don't know. Why's it crouched over like that?
" And feeling the wall.
"Oh.. i think he's blind. Why didn't his parents drown him at birth?
"Too soft I guesse, sigh.. i suppose now WE have to do it FOR them...

301 to 338 of 338 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Hide in Plain Sight All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.